Even if he's a dictator, he ain't that stupid. Just remember that he is a western-trained ophtalmologist by profession, before he got reluctantly sucked into his current position. If I were in the position of some IT staff there, I would have politely informed him that his password isn't secure and needs to be changed, and I'm sure he would have appreciated that... and would have replaced it with 54321.
I mean, seriously... should you ever come across such an HDD with classified, secret or even top secret data on it, what are you supposed to do? You can't even send it back, because you will be charged for having had a glimpse at classified information, right? But if you simply reformatted the drive, or destroyed it, you may have nuked important information that may not have been backed up. Pretty hairy stuff.
Let's take FreeBSD as an example. FreeBSD and GPL code coexisted a long time just fine, that is until FSF switched gcc to GPLv3. At this point, FreeBSD was stuck with the last gcc and binutils published under GPLv2, and they had no choice but to start looking elsewhere for a replacement (currently transitioning towards clang/llvm). In this case, licensing a central piece of OSS infrastructure exclusively under GPLv3 was quite hostile to non-GPL OSS (!) projects that depends on it and was clearly not nice. On the other hand, enforcing GPL(v3) on closed-source vendors like Sony who never played nice with the OSS world is a perfectly acceptable policy, IMHO. And I'm saying this even though I am a strong advocate of BSD-license licensing: you GPL folks have no reason to bow to those who don't reciprocate in some sense... but you could show more flexibility towards OSS projects by dual-licensing under GPLv2 and GPLv3.
That's right. They've won their war by turning this formerly free country into a state of fear and paranoia, where people are being indoctrinated and taught by the State to fear their own shadows and to constantly look over their shoulders. If at all, this FBI flyer is material proof of the terrorists' success, and that's a shame.
In this particular case, this ambassador may not have acted out of malice (she's just one little cog in a giant machine and couldn't have prevented it anyway), but the government that ordered her to sign it certainly intended to harm Internet. There's no doubt about this. After all, ACTA has been negotiated for a long time, and those responsible in the governments knew full well all the objections that have been brought against it. So Hanlon wasn't right here: ACTA was born out of malice, not out of stupidity.
The should go to jail, not for the silly point of facilitating copyright infringement, but to publicly make a point. Somewhat like Gandhi, who submitted to beatings by the British on his own will, showing the public the whole blatant injustice of their behavior... and finally winning the PR war. That's exactly the same TPB guys should be doing, instead of hiding in some jungle out there and looking like criminals on the run. Besides, living conditions in jails in Sweden and in most other northern European countries aren't as bad as in the US or other third world countries: it shouldn't be too inconveniencing for them... and they could spend the time to study. Really, they should go to jail, instead of hiding... and being forced to go there anyway later.
It's way too expensive for WikiLeaks to do this alone. However, there's already a satellite in orbit, and it's called the moon. HAM operators have been bouncing RF waves off the moon for ages now, and that was with old technology. Imagine what you could do with current tech!
Right! And the time to charge the battery matters as well. The ideal power supply would be some yet to be invented new generation ultra capacitor buffer as frontend to an efficient chemical battery backend that you could charge by briefly touching an 800.000 Volt line with a telescope antenna (say with 1.21 Gigawatt). But this ain't gonna happen anytime soon, especially not with this hypothetical ultra capacitor tagged in your body!
A war on Piracy would be nothing less than a war on Culture. Which culture didn't grow, based on the sharing of knowledge, ideas, memes, music, etc..., including transforming, merging of ideas? Too sad the dimwits in the White House, Congress, and Senate are too blind to see the damage they're inflicting. Or maybe they're just too corrupt and would sell their grandma for a couple of dimes... but that's nothing new.
Not really. What they mean is that ISPs will be forced to police the Net instead of the content providers or even the State. This way, there would be no costly and hazardous legal proceeding should some poor guy get cut off: it will be a business decision, not an administrative one. That's similar in spirit to what other ACTA member countries are doing: making ISPs responsible and turning them into an internet police whose decisions can't be appealed. Pretty slippery slope and dangerous precedent here.
What's preventing us from writing a secondary boot loader that gets invoked by the digitally signed windows 8 one, a.k.a. chainloading? Instead of booting some Windows kernel, that W8 bootloader will simply boot something that *looks* like a W8 kernel. And even if that primary boot loader checks the signature of that W8 kernel, since that kernel binary will always be the same, how long until we create a hash collision to satisfy that requirement? All in all, I don't see a big problem here, should M$ really tried to play evil once again.
According to this excellent book, Copyright was first introduced by the Brits and more or less forced upon the US (among others). Now, it's quite ironic (and sad at the same time) that the former British Copyright extremism is coming back from the US to haunt their ordinary citizens.
The US government created the climate that allowed BREIN and similar local copyright enforcement groups to prosper. Just look at the leaked cables from the US Dept. of State to find plenty of evidence.
The media industry are the makers of popularity. Without their blessing, a politician is dead fish. So no politician would dare to oppose this media cartel, lest he or she loses all public(ized) support.
That's true for gTLDs, but most non-US CCTLDs don't fall under US jurisdiction. Technically as well, it isn't censorable from the US, because all the US could do would be to blacklist a whole country at the root servers level. So you can always host your domain(s) with those foreign cctlds. It won't be as generically nice as.com,.org,.info,... but what's wrong with.de,.fr,.ru,.ua and so on?
I think what is really needed is to get all the big name companies together and sponsor research into an alternative to DNS that can't be touched by any government and you can't sue for trademark infringement.
The problem ist't DNS blocking, it's the capacity of Gov't to block any website at the BGP level right in the main routers of Tier-1 backbones. That's the whole point of the uproar: the copyright lobby and their politicians have embarked on an arms race with us, the Internet Community, and who knows where all this will lead to?
When I said that SOPA was my reason for transferring, the call center guy asked whether it was GoDaddy's initial position or their later decisions that made me want to transfer.
Apparently, management is still confused at GoDaddy, if they ask their support people to find out whether people are leaving because of their SOPA support or because of their reversal. That may explain their ambivalent press release: they can't make up their mind whether the majority of their customer base is anti- or pro-SOPA, and probably still think that the pro-SOPAs are in the majority. If something is scaring with GoDaddy, it's this fundamental disconnect with their customers.
Never mind that most applications which work on FreeBSD do so through a Linux compatibility layer which is kludged together, at best, and a maintenance and security nightmare at worst.
What? Most 3rd party applications in/usr/ports run natively on FreeBSD. In fact, on my developer workstation with its nearly 1,000 installed ports, not one of them depends on the Linux compatibility layer. Only the oddball closed-source ones like, say, Mathematica or Oracle Server requires the Linuxulator.
Slashdot Mirror
What's wrong with releasing your code under public domain anonymously (be sure to comb every file with a fine comb though before doing so)?
Even if he's a dictator, he ain't that stupid. Just remember that he is a western-trained ophtalmologist by profession, before he got reluctantly sucked into his current position. If I were in the position of some IT staff there, I would have politely informed him that his password isn't secure and needs to be changed, and I'm sure he would have appreciated that... and would have replaced it with 54321.
I mean, seriously... should you ever come across such an HDD with classified, secret or even top secret data on it, what are you supposed to do? You can't even send it back, because you will be charged for having had a glimpse at classified information, right? But if you simply reformatted the drive, or destroyed it, you may have nuked important information that may not have been backed up. Pretty hairy stuff.
Each MP3 is simply one (huge) number.
Let's take FreeBSD as an example. FreeBSD and GPL code coexisted a long time just fine, that is until FSF switched gcc to GPLv3. At this point, FreeBSD was stuck with the last gcc and binutils published under GPLv2, and they had no choice but to start looking elsewhere for a replacement (currently transitioning towards clang/llvm). In this case, licensing a central piece of OSS infrastructure exclusively under GPLv3 was quite hostile to non-GPL OSS (!) projects that depends on it and was clearly not nice. On the other hand, enforcing GPL(v3) on closed-source vendors like Sony who never played nice with the OSS world is a perfectly acceptable policy, IMHO. And I'm saying this even though I am a strong advocate of BSD-license licensing: you GPL folks have no reason to bow to those who don't reciprocate in some sense... but you could show more flexibility towards OSS projects by dual-licensing under GPLv2 and GPLv3.
That's right. They've won their war by turning this formerly free country into a state of fear and paranoia, where people are being indoctrinated and taught by the State to fear their own shadows and to constantly look over their shoulders. If at all, this FBI flyer is material proof of the terrorists' success, and that's a shame.
In this particular case, this ambassador may not have acted out of malice (she's just one little cog in a giant machine and couldn't have prevented it anyway), but the government that ordered her to sign it certainly intended to harm Internet. There's no doubt about this. After all, ACTA has been negotiated for a long time, and those responsible in the governments knew full well all the objections that have been brought against it. So Hanlon wasn't right here: ACTA was born out of malice, not out of stupidity.
The should go to jail, not for the silly point of facilitating copyright infringement, but to publicly make a point. Somewhat like Gandhi, who submitted to beatings by the British on his own will, showing the public the whole blatant injustice of their behavior... and finally winning the PR war. That's exactly the same TPB guys should be doing, instead of hiding in some jungle out there and looking like criminals on the run. Besides, living conditions in jails in Sweden and in most other northern European countries aren't as bad as in the US or other third world countries: it shouldn't be too inconveniencing for them... and they could spend the time to study. Really, they should go to jail, instead of hiding... and being forced to go there anyway later.
It's way too expensive for WikiLeaks to do this alone. However, there's already a satellite in orbit, and it's called the moon. HAM operators have been bouncing RF waves off the moon for ages now, and that was with old technology. Imagine what you could do with current tech!
Right! And the time to charge the battery matters as well. The ideal power supply would be some yet to be invented new generation ultra capacitor buffer as frontend to an efficient chemical battery backend that you could charge by briefly touching an 800.000 Volt line with a telescope antenna (say with 1.21 Gigawatt). But this ain't gonna happen anytime soon, especially not with this hypothetical ultra capacitor tagged in your body!
So just hire a bunch of lobbyists to lobby Congress to end lobbying.
A war on Piracy would be nothing less than a war on Culture. Which culture didn't grow, based on the sharing of knowledge, ideas, memes, music, etc..., including transforming, merging of ideas? Too sad the dimwits in the White House, Congress, and Senate are too blind to see the damage they're inflicting. Or maybe they're just too corrupt and would sell their grandma for a couple of dimes... but that's nothing new.
Not really. What they mean is that ISPs will be forced to police the Net instead of the content providers or even the State. This way, there would be no costly and hazardous legal proceeding should some poor guy get cut off: it will be a business decision, not an administrative one. That's similar in spirit to what other ACTA member countries are doing: making ISPs responsible and turning them into an internet police whose decisions can't be appealed. Pretty slippery slope and dangerous precedent here.
How would we communicate without IP then? Piggy-backing on ICMP?
What's preventing us from writing a secondary boot loader that gets invoked by the digitally signed windows 8 one, a.k.a. chainloading? Instead of booting some Windows kernel, that W8 bootloader will simply boot something that *looks* like a W8 kernel. And even if that primary boot loader checks the signature of that W8 kernel, since that kernel binary will always be the same, how long until we create a hash collision to satisfy that requirement? All in all, I don't see a big problem here, should M$ really tried to play evil once again.
According to this excellent book, Copyright was first introduced by the Brits and more or less forced upon the US (among others). Now, it's quite ironic (and sad at the same time) that the former British Copyright extremism is coming back from the US to haunt their ordinary citizens.
Your comment will be redirected to Vice President Biden, who's our local guru on IP laws. Sincerely yours, President Obama.
The US government created the climate that allowed BREIN and similar local copyright enforcement groups to prosper. Just look at the leaked cables from the US Dept. of State to find plenty of evidence.
The media industry are the makers of popularity. Without their blessing, a politician is dead fish. So no politician would dare to oppose this media cartel, lest he or she loses all public(ized) support.
That's true for gTLDs, but most non-US CCTLDs don't fall under US jurisdiction. Technically as well, it isn't censorable from the US, because all the US could do would be to blacklist a whole country at the root servers level. So you can always host your domain(s) with those foreign cctlds. It won't be as generically nice as .com, .org, .info, ... but what's wrong with .de, .fr, .ru, .ua and so on?
Maybe GoDaddy belongs in part or entirely to a Media Conglomerate now?
The problem ist't DNS blocking, it's the capacity of Gov't to block any website at the BGP level right in the main routers of Tier-1 backbones. That's the whole point of the uproar: the copyright lobby and their politicians have embarked on an arms race with us, the Internet Community, and who knows where all this will lead to?
Nothing against Gandi (good registrar actually), but as a French company, aren't they subject to HADOPI that is similar to SOPA?
Apparently, management is still confused at GoDaddy, if they ask their support people to find out whether people are leaving because of their SOPA support or because of their reversal. That may explain their ambivalent press release: they can't make up their mind whether the majority of their customer base is anti- or pro-SOPA, and probably still think that the pro-SOPAs are in the majority. If something is scaring with GoDaddy, it's this fundamental disconnect with their customers.
What? Most 3rd party applications in /usr/ports run natively on FreeBSD. In fact, on my developer workstation with its nearly 1,000 installed ports, not one of them depends on the Linux compatibility layer. Only the oddball closed-source ones like, say, Mathematica or Oracle Server requires the Linuxulator.